Classic VS Practial

[RCastillo]

Originally posted by Seig

I think people put a little bit too much ephasis on doing a text book technique in the "real world". In all of my adventures, the only times I have ever responded with text book technique is when there was a text book attack. I can think of twice. The rest of the time, I relied on my basics. Afterall, the third phase of Kenpo is the formulation phase.

Adventures, you say? I'd like to know more about those!

Care to divulge?

As for me, no one's been stupid enough to tangle with me! Say what you want about those good luck charms, they really do work!

 

[Kirk]

Originally posted by Seig

Afterall, the third phase of Kenpo is the formulation phase.

What are the first and second phases? When does each being?

 

[satans.barber]

Originally posted by Kirk



What are the first and second phases? When does each being?

Isn't the first phase the 'ideal phase' where the opponent is stood in just the right way etc. (i.e. it never happens outside of the dojo!) and the second phase the 'what if?' phase where we start to bring in second punches, or unavailable targets etc.?

Ian.

 

[Seig]

Originally posted by RCastillo



Adventures, you say? I'd like to know more about those!

Care to divulge?

As for me, no one's been stupid enough to tangle with me! Say what you want about those good luck charms, they really do work!

Um, no. One of these days we can sit around and I can regale you, not online though.

 

[Seig]

Originally posted by satans.barber



Isn't the first phase the 'ideal phase' where the opponent is stood in just the right way etc. (i.e. it never happens outside of the dojo!) and the second phase the 'what if?' phase where we start to bring in second punches, or unavailable targets etc.?

Ian.

Yes, you are correct. It seems to me that different people arrive at these phases at different times.
What I TRY to do is this:
Ideal: White through Purple
What If: Blue through Brown 2
Formulation: Brown 1 on

 

[Doc]

---I think it's a bit of a disservice, though, to lump what you call Motion kenpo in with the chaos that is Jeet Kune Do. ---

Nope. They are the same. Conceptual vehicles loosely interpreted by teachers, and nobody doing what Parker/Lee was doing. Both Lee and Parker told you "WHAT" to do (not how) while they themselves did something different.

---I'm sure there are some "crossover instructors" in kenpo, but I don't see the "lesson plan" mentality you describe. ----

Almost all of the seniors are crossover. It was what Parker used to start Motion-Kenpo. Check all the asterisks on the family tree. Most of them are not cross referenced in kenpo, including me.

---I don't see the chaotic mish-mash of philosophies in kenpo, nor the lack of in-depth knowledge that a "lesson plan" system would guarantee. ----

I guess it's relative. I've seen very little real in-depth knowledge. Ed Parker never wrote anything beyond a "Lesson Plan" for MK. No where in any of Parker's writing does he tell you "HOW" to do something. He gives you concepts, ideas, and general guidelines, but no "HOW." Even the manuals tell you "WHAT" to do, not "HOW" to do it. "Right punch to the left rib cage," is a "WHAT" not a "HOW."

---Maybe it's because I'm lucky and have good instructors; or maybe it's because black-belt factories are a losing game in the long run and they are destined to die out ("Martial Darwinism?" :shrug: ).----

Don't know your teachers. But the factories are doing well, because most want to believe they are truly learning something and can defend themselves.

---1) I think our two definitions of "Assumption of Failure" are different.---

Perhaps.

---2) I think we need to distinguish between an individual's ability to execute a technique in the real world and the technique itself working in the real world.---

For me, there is no difference. Why would there be?

---3) All (good) teachers (regardless of the system) work their students to ensure the basics are mastered and intend for those techniques to work for the student.----

Yep! That is what they are supposed to do in kenpo, but most don't.

---4) The teacher is the critical component of the system -- a good system will not work with a bad teacher, and a poor system can work with a good teacher.---

Isn't that what I said? No rebuttal, just my point of view.

 

[fanged_seamus]

I think I'll still see distinctions where you see none -- particularly in terms of our definitions of "Assumption of Failure" and "crossover instructors" (I see a difference between an instructor who has trained in other martial arts prior to realizing kenpo was what they were looking for and one who "jumped on the bandwagon" as an opportunist).

And I'm not sure I understand the difference between the "What" and "How" you describe. How many "Whats" does it take to make a "How?" In principle, I can conceptually see the difference, but I'm not sure I can distinguish it in the real world. Care to explain further?

Ah well -- at least we agree on the value of a good teacher.

Still would like a better understanding of the difference between the "What" and "How" of kenpo instruction....

Respectfully,
Tad Finnegan

 

[Doc]

Originally posted by fanged_seamus

I think I'll still see distinctions where you see none -- particularly in terms of our definitions of "Assumption of Failure" and "crossover instructors" (I see a difference between an instructor who has trained in other martial arts prior to realizing kenpo was what they were looking for and one who "jumped on the bandwagon" as an opportunist).

And I'm not sure I understand the difference between the "What" and "How" you describe. How many "Whats" does it take to make a "How?" In principle, I can conceptually see the difference, but I'm not sure I can distinguish it in the real world. Care to explain further?

Ah well -- at least we agree on the value of a good teacher.

Still would like a better understanding of the difference between the "What" and "How" of kenpo instruction....

Respectfully,
Tad Finnegan

That's the problem. Most seem to think the what is the how. "What" has been "sold" as "how" for so long there are generations who think it's "how." Perhaps we'll meet one day.

 

[Goldendragon7]

is often referred to as the methods of ........... what methods do you learn Kenpo by?

What Kenpo do you exactly study?

:asian:

 

[WilliamTLear]

Originally posted by Doc



That's the problem. Most seem to think the what is the how. "What" has been "sold" as "how" for so long there are generations who think it's "how." Perhaps we'll meet one day.

I've been taught the Whats and the Hows, even the Whys... although there are some evident differences in the way that I do Kenpo compared to others. Not wrong, just different.

Take Care,
Billy

 

[WilliamTLear]

Originally posted by Sigung86

I guess I'm kind of old school, but I find that pursuit of the "classical" leads to the practical. If you, in fact, approach the study that way.

Not eing able to complete a technique as shown, in nowise, denigrates what you are doing. It's nice to know, however, that if a technique should be needed to go beyond the first move, that you do have that bag of tools.

Dan

When the purpose behind the Traditional Way is obscure, change is evident, and the loss information almost definate.

Talk to you later,
Billy

 

[fanged_seamus]

Originally posted by Goldendragon7

How is often referred to as the methods of ........... what methods do you learn Kenpo by?

What Kenpo do you exactly study?

:asian:

In answer to your question(s), I study American Kenpo through an AKKI-affiliated studio. As far as methods go, here's the short list:

1) Watch and mimic
2) Repetition, repetition, repetition
3) Questioning why a move is necessary (or isn't)
4) Trial and error
5) Asking questions about principles in use
6) Trying to find "holes" in the techniques
7) Reading anything I can get my hands on
...

I could go on forever. I'm more of a thinker sometimes than a "do"er, so I want to know everything I can about a technique while I practice it. I know it can frustrate the junior instructors because I ask so many dang questions, but hey, it forces them to learn, too, right?

As I said earlier, I conceptually see the difference between "How" and "What," and your explanation of "methods" helps a little. As always, though, more shared insight would be appreciated!

Tad Finnegan

 

[matthewgreenland]

I really enjoyed the creativity. That got a chuckle out of me.
I liked that. Good take on the Formula.

Have a great day.

Matt

 

[Goldendragon7]

Originally posted by fanged_seamus
In answer to your question(s), I study American Kenpo through an AKKI-affiliated studio. As far as methods go, here's the short list:

1) Watch and mimic
2) Repetition, repetition, repetition
3) Questioning why a move is necessary (or isn't)
4) Trial and error
5) Asking questions about principles in use
6) Trying to find "holes" in the techniques
7) Reading anything I can get my hands on
...

I could go on forever. I'm more of a thinker sometimes than a "do"er, so I want to know everything I can about a technique while I practice it. I know it can frustrate the junior instructors because I ask so many dang questions, but hey, it forces them to learn, too, right?

As I said earlier, I conceptually see the difference between "How" and "What," and your explanation of "methods" helps a little. As always, though, more shared insight would be appreciated!

Tad Finnegan

Great Job....... you are a rare breed....... spread your attitude!!

As to additional shared insights........ just ask for further info whenever you want!!

:asian:

 

[RCastillo]

Originally posted by Goldendragon7



Great Job....... you are a rare breed....... spread your attitude!!

As to additional shared insights........ just ask for further info whenever you want!!

:asian:

That copy cat!(Tad Finnegan) Boy, what some people won't do to steal someones elses thunder!:soapbox:

 

[fanged_seamus]

That's me..."Mr. Thunder-Stealer."

Oh, no wait, that was my Native American neighbor back in Nebraska....

Tad "Stop Asking So Many Damn Questions!" Finnegan
:rofl: